Henry Bauer
Darin BrownMore reviews of DOGMATISM book
Posted by Henry Bauer on 2014/05/22
Two substantial reviews offering much room for further thought have just been published of Dogmatism in Science and Medicine: How Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth:
Journal of Scientific Exploration, 28 (2014) 142-48, by Donald J. DeGracia
Dogmatism in Science and Medicine (DSM) by Henry H. Bauer is about the corruption of modern science. For practicing scientists it is a disturbing book to read. Medicine is bitter, yet we put up with it to get better. DSM is bitter medicine intended to improve the health of science.
. . . .
Dr. Bauer does a professional, competent, and important job bringing the corruption of modern science into the light. The criticisms offered above do not detract from the fundamental correctness of the picture DSM paints, but instead underscore its seriousness, and the need to further refine the picture. To scoff at DSM or to think it is off-base is merely to reveal that the scoffer is woefully uninformed about the transformations that have occurred in science over the past decades. If one is a practicing scientist, or a concerned citizen of good will, one ignores this book at one’s own peril.
Journal of Scientific Exploration, 28 (2014) 149-52, by Brian Josephson
At the end of this fascinating book, Bauer asks the question: Can 21st century science become trustworthy again? He suggests that change must come from outside the existing institutions, which merely serve to perpetuate knowledge monopolies, but first the need for change must become generally recognized . Possibilities discussed include a Science Court; independent, publicly funded institutions that can assess scientific claims of public importance; and designated funds for non-mainstream research. Something of this nature is clearly needed.
HIV/AIDS Skepticism 
Leo Klebanov said
All these talks are about HIV is not cause of AIDS. Nothing about what is real nature of AIDS. Anybody interested? I have something to share, but only if somebody care.
Henry Bauer said
Leo Klebanov:
Many people have discussed the real nature of AIDS, see for example http://thecaseagainsthiv.net/#section-number-2 and The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory
Lukas said
Recently it has happened to me to reread the history of Smon by Peter Duisberg: http://www.primitivism.com/smon.htm
It has so many similarities with the history of aids…What i find sadly impressive is that there is no mention of the former wrong viral ipothesys in official sources.Just an exemple looking for Smon in wikipedia it starts with the toxic definition of Smon pretending people not to know that medical establishment led to death so many people…So i was thinking that probably what has happened in the past,that many had to die couse azt in name of a putative virus,is now furiosly rejected by orthodoxy,while in future(not near),when i’m sure the wrong evidence of the hiv-aids ipothesys will come out,there will be no mention of the actual trumpeted viral theory,so strong is the power of deceit.
Henry Bauer said
Lukas:
Yes, SMON is a pertinent case, and not only Duesberg wrote about it in connection with HIV/AIDS. Kuru is also pertinent, the mistaken view that “mad cow disease” and its ilk were owing to a “slow virus”, that’s where the mistaken notion of a retrovirus with long latent period started.
Leo Klebanov said
I have looked through recommended reading and found nothing new: it looks like if the patient with compromised immunity suddenly started healthy lifestyle — all the problems went away. This doesn’t happen in reality. There are many who never even took drugs and ate well, but still acquired progressive deficiency of immunity. You prefer to ignore this, because can not explain. Hemophiliacs cases are not explained either.